The Politics of Coercion

In The Politics of Coercion: Toward a Theory of Coercive Airpower for Post-Cold War Conflict, Lt. Col. Ellwood P. "Skip" Hinman IV confronts an issue of high interest to airmen and policy makers alike: What does coercion theory suggest about the use of airpower in the early twenty-first century? More specifically, Colonel Hinman seeks to determine whether any of the existing theories of coercion can stand alone as a coherent, substantive, and codified approach to airpower employment. Framing his analysis on three key attributes of conflict in the post-Cold War era - limited, nonprotracted war; political re-straint; and the importance of a better state of peace - Hinman examines the contemporary applicability of the four major theories of coercive airpower: punishment, risk, decapitation, and denial. For reasons explained in these pages, Hinman finds limitations in each of the prevailing theories of coercion. In proposing a new construct that more adequately meets the needs of post-Cold War conflict, the author recommends a three-phase "hybrid approach" to coercion that draws on the strengths and minimized the weaknesses of existing theory. Arguing that aspects of this hybrid approach were evident in the employment of airpower in Operations Desert Storm, Deliberate Force, and Allied Force, Hinman contends that his hybrid theory of coercion is uniquely well suited for the unsettled geopolitical landscape of the post-Cold War era.